[Release] activeUsers class.

[Vineyard]

IMO if you or your publishing company can't afford Windows+MSSQL STD. easily, then you shouldn't be developing an MMORPG. Private servers should be able to afford both as well if they have any hopes of making a good player environment. I see where you're coming from, cheaper is better, but for any big game you'll need the commercial license of MySQL anyways. The fee is relatively small considering you would most likely only deploy one physical machine with MSSQL per "realm". Also, MSSQL can communicate easily with linux machines. In fact, my setup atm uses a linux webserver with a MSSQL database.

Fair enough. MSSQL may offer more optimisation opportunities in the long run, but I'll still have to disagree with having to "be able to afford both as well if they have any hopes of making a good player environment"... Premature optimisation is not very wise and even less when you're planning on spending hard money on multiple windows boxes + MSSQL licenses (in case you're being really serious, you'll need replication, too).

For all intents and purposes, when datasets are huge and performance is critical, go for it. But an average company with even moderate high traffic will probably find MySQL's performance features more than satisfying. That also applies to whatever private server you're developing, the bottleneck ought to be somewhere else than in the database. But when you approach Craigslist's or Twitter's traffic, you can (and should) start thinking about alternative, and in this case more expensive options.

And I'm positive that "cheaper is better" applies almost everywhere. Customers don't simply buy Microsoft's databases when they could have a serious competitor (for example, Postgres) for free, they buy it solely for support and brand recognition. They assume that Microsoft is a stable provider that can give them support if needed.

[Ron]

Chill. There's commercial support for MySQL, too. What's wrong with using it for a high load game server, or MSSQL for low load web backends, respectively? Don't you realise that MySQL expands far beyond simple tables and queries as much as MSSQL does?


If you can't manage the anger, maybe you should just consider browsing away from debates like these. No-one forces you to read all the "mindless" jabbering in here. Next time try to bring in some facts and not some retarded nonsense how licensing directly correlates with the quality of the product.

The anger part of that post was mainly directed at rice, but if you keep on it can be directed at you too.


Do you think companies would really pay licensing fees for MSSQL when MySQL is better? If MySQL is free and better, why are they paying for MSSQL? Its not nonsense, it backs up my point. Companies pay for the better product for their situation. Why would they pay for something that sucks?


Most of the people on this forum will never need to understand the differences between database software, however it is important you at least make yourself aware of them before calling one shitty and pointless over another.